Would the results been any different if the next four were in? Notre Dame. OSU. Baylor and Ole Miss. SEC SEC. SEC
Can we stop the expand the playoff talk??
- Thread starter jonesz21
- Start date
I agree 100%. I saw some stats that only 3 or so of the games were decided by 1 score or less. The rest was an average margin of victory of 26.6
Yeah, it’s just about money….and trying to keep Bama from winning. They’re quite happy to destroy the sport if it means more money. How would the results look any different with Utah, Ole Miss and Pitt in the playoffs?
Last 3 NC games have all been blowouts, not sure if it’d make a difference ….
2021: 52-24
2020: 42-25
2019: 44-16
This idea sounds good until YOUR team is left out 🤷♀️
2021: 52-24
2020: 42-25
2019: 44-16
This idea sounds good until YOUR team is left out 🤷♀️
Last edited:
This year there were only 2-3 top teams. Other years there have been 5. Leaving a potential undefeated team with a potentially valid claim they are the top team. An 8 team playoff is perfect. 12 or 16 too many.
reduce the regular season by one or eliminate conference championship games.
Disagree strongly! I was for an 8 team playoff from the beginning and still am. Go back to an 11 game season and give more teams a chance. Sure they got beat badly but I`m sure their fan bases were thrilled that they were there. If it stays at 4 we may never get in. Too many good teams have been, and will be, left out because they played a harder schedule. That is my main argument. No way to make schedules more equal unless there are 4 super conferences one day. No, Clemson didn`t get in this year but easily could have with the weak ACC schedule.
The championship games make to much money. Can't seeing them being eliminated.
I wish we could, but to answer your question in the title, No, I don't think we can stop it.
I think with 8 teams we have a different final 2. Cincy and Michigan deserve to get in but neither were the 3rd or 4th best team in the country.
The fact that some of the same teams appear almost every year should tell you it needs to be expanded to at least 8 teams. Another problem is the fact that a conference championship doesn't mean anything in the context of the current 4 team "playoff."
I am for playoff expansion if not just for more meaningful games during the holidays. Talent is stacked in 2 spots right now it won’t always be that way. I purposefully will not watch the national championships and will set all of my streaming equipment not to record it. I don’t agree with a team losing its conference championship and still having a chance to win the national championship. That has to account for something. That’s not hate for Georgia, I would have the same opinion for anyone. I do not look for the ratings to be good.
I actually think the basis for this thread against expanding is actually the basis for why it should expand. Going to 8 teams would at least give fans a decent game or two, something the 4-team playoff has failed to do regularly. In addition, more teams can capitalize off a playoff win and enter that “great” category. What we’re seeing with the 4-team playoff is the same teams having success. Alabama and Georgia have far more 5* players than anybody else in the field. They reap the benefit again. 8 games gives more opportunity.
I’m not a huge “expand” guy. But the 4 team playoff hasn’t been exciting.
I’m not a huge “expand” guy. But the 4 team playoff hasn’t been exciting.
So by this logic clearly we should stop the national championship games.
Expanding the play-offs makes sense to me. If we had 6 teams, I'm not sure Cincy would have made it into the final 4....maybe not even Michigan.
This is the worst argument for me. “People can’t beat Bama on the field so we need to change the rules.”
Is it supposed to be exciting or is it supposed to be about determining the best team? The playoffs have been flawless in determining the legitimate champion. People just want to keep tweaking the system to try coming up with a way to cause the best teams to stumble.
In any event, it’s not the fault of the playoffs that things are top heavy right now. Folks just aren’t patient. Given time, all teams cycle out. Always.
Besides, every P5 team has a shot. Just win all your games. It’s like kids in school wanting a professor to change the grading scale so they can say they got an A when they only had a B.
I mean, sports are entertainment so a part of it is certainly an attempt to have good games. Of course we want to find the best teams too. But the current setup is really benefitting just a few teams. Opening to 8 would certainly create more opportunities for teams to get a program-changing win.
It’s better than it used to be for sure. But I’ve slowly changed my mind on this and truly believe 8 teams should play. It’s only 1 more game for 2 teams. But it makes for better games, possible upsets, and could turn a few players to other schools. I don’t see what it could hurt to have 4 more meaningful games in a world where the bowl system is dying rapidly.
What I don’t get is the argument I heard the announcers in the Outback Bowl make which is that players who are playing in bowls just outside of the playoffs feel like they don’t need to play bc they don’t have a shot. But teams in those bowls NEVER had a shot at the title. I get that we live in the participation trophy generation. The kids who are playing college ball now are the kids who feel like everyone deserves a trophy, so the expanded playoff push is a product of that.
Fix the bowl problem by getting rid of most them. Raise bowl qualification to 8 wins. Nobody wants to see MTSU, UTEP, UTSA etc in a bowl game.
But what do those schools then have to play for? Are there too many bowl games? Yes. The SEC shouldn’t be sending 6-6 teams. But I’m fine with a 10-2 UTEP going bowling. If not, create their own division of football…which is coming.
I think Kirk and Desmond nailed it this morning. This generation of players, for the most part, don’t love football. At least the NFL prospects. Obviously the majority of players are opting in. In addition, this generation is very self-centered. I for one was tough TEAM. I get that’s old school…but it’s also been considered noble forever. Somehow these guys can look their teammates in the eyes and tell them they aren’t going to play with them and for them again.
Bottom line…their in it for the $$. And this world has nothing to offer but $$.
The only way to take people out of it is to only take conference champs to the playoff That would solve the “this team should have got in” argument. Win conference and you in. Don’t and you out. Not in a conference you left out
When St. Nick retires, it’ll tighten up and many more will have a chance.
watching the games from the sky cast with the sounds on the field instead of the booth was really good.
watching the games from the sky cast with the sounds on the field instead of the booth was really good.
I strongly disagree. What we have today is a bunch of meaningless bowls. How is that better than an expanded playoff?
Cincy being in there is enough to show a “committee” will never get the top 4 right. IMO they never have.
It needs to go to 8, and there are easy changes to make it work.
No it's not. It's a disaster. Might as well make it 64 teams.
Only to certain fans.
I guess our win in CLT was meaningless? Our whole season was meaningless as well?
I wish to the Almighty we could. But people don't value meritocracy anymore and don't appreciate that we have a 13-game play-in system already, well, everyone but Notre Dame.
5 Conference Champions and 3 at large bids, that way all the major conferences have a guaranteed stake. It will help to create parity and make the playoff more exciting
If we had true inter-conference matchups during the year instead of teams scheduling cupcakes, I would agree. As of now, it is way too subjective to be based on "merit."
If they do get the Top 4 right, nobody will ever agree. Personally, I thought it was right this time. Notre Dame certainly didn’t belong. It’s not the 4 best teams. It’s the 4 mister deserving really. Otherwise why even play the games?
This is exactly right. I don’t know if there’s a solution for that, or if it even matters at this point.
I can’t wrap my mind around players opting out of the Rose Bowl.
Bingo. You’ve got 13 games to show you belong there.
Who would you have put in instead of cincy that would have competed with Alabama better? I think the committee has done a great job of selecting the final 4. I can’t say they have ever really gotten it wrong.
I think that’s the key thing: these kids opting out don’t love football. They probably have their heads filled with NFL dreams from the time they’re in Pop Warner and think everyone owes them something. The Outback Bowl announcers actually said schools had to find a way to make it worth their while to play in bowl games.
There’s no way to fix this problem so there’s no solution to it. Aside from straight up paying kids to play. Even then, They’ve gotten paid to play in 12 or 13 games, they probably don’t think it’s necessary to play the bowl game to make more money.
10-2 Ohio State would have for sure. But you can’t have a 2 loss team in there, though they were probably more deserving than Cincy considering the comparative schedules.
Cincy scored 6 pts and barely cracked 200 yds of offense. Not to say that Cincy didn’t compete throughout the game, but that had nothing to do with the outcome. If anything, Bama took their foot off the gas. So maybe Cincy played better than Michigan, but still had absolutely no chance.
The solution is don’t pay them. Let them decide not to go to college and see how much stock they have in the draft 3 years later. The schools offer them platforms, training, coaching, in addition to an education. There are PLENTY of people that still love football that would gladly take those scholarships and keep playing. The issue really is about 1-2% of the athletes.
TOSU is still a good year away. Too young and inexperienced at too many positions.
